New models towards assessing anti-cancer therapeutics

Cancer is the subject of intense research around the world, but many questions about how the disease works remain unanswered. How exactly does cancer start and how do tumours grow? In fact, at present there are ten times more anticancer drugs being tested in clinical trials than there were 15 years ago. However, many of the new anticancer agents are predicted to show clinical benefit in only small subpopulations of patients. The cancer stem cell model could explain not only how some cancers work but also why patients suffer relapses, providing a good opportunity to gain insight into the reasons why agents work or, more commonly, don't work, before going into a clinical trial.     

A parallel phase I/II clinical trial design for combination therapies

The use of multiple drugs in a single clinical trial or as a therapeutic strategy has become common, particularly in the treatment of cancer. Because traditional trials are designed to evaluate one agent at a time, the evaluation of therapies in combination requires specialized trial designs. In place of the traditional separate phase I and II trials, we propose using a parallel phase I/II clinical trial to evaluate simultaneously the safety and efficacy of combination dose levels, and select the optimal combination dose. The trial is started with an initial period of dose escalation, then patients are randomly assigned to admissible dose levels. These dose levels are compared with each other. Bayesian posterior probabilities are used in the randomization to adaptively assign more patients to doses with higher efficacy levels. Combination doses with lower efficacy are temporarily closed and those with intolerable toxicity are eliminated from the trial. The trial is stopped if the posterior probability for safety, efficacy, or futility crosses a prespecified boundary. For illustration, we apply the design to a combination chemotherapy trial for leukemia. We use simulation studies to assess the operating characteristics of the parallel phase I/II trial design, and compare it to a conventional design for a standard phase I and phase II trial. The simulations show that the proposed design saves sample size, has better power, and efficiently assigns more patients to doses with higher efficacy levels.     

Applying results of randomised trials to clinical practice: impact of losses before randomisation.

The problem of generalisability in randomised clinical trials was highlighted by studies that entered only 10-14% of screened patients. To determine the magnitude and source of prerandomisation losses in clinical trials a survey was conducted of 41 trials listed in the 1979 inventory of the National Institute of Health. Two thirds of the trials maintained screening logs, but only half maintained any records of the number of patients who met the eligibility criteria but were not entered into the trial. Among 21 trials (51%) that kept data on the number of patients who were eligible but not entered, losses of eligible subjects were attributable to refusals by patients in 25% and refusals by physicians in 29%. Other protocol requirements accounted for the remaining losses of eligible patients. Only a few trials documented the characteristics of patients who were eligible but not entered; in those trials the patients who were not entered were similar demographically but differed clinically from those enrolled. Thus minimising prerandomisation losses of eligible patients requires the use of less restrictive criteria for entering patients. Twenty four of the trials achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goals, eight between 25% and 74%, and six less than 25%. Among trials that screened less than twice their projected sample size, only three out of 13 (23%) achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goal. By contrast, 12 out of 16 trials (75%) that screened more than twice their projected sample size achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goal. Screening large numbers of patients appears to be a pragmatic requirement for success in achieving recruitment goals; therefore, trials should not be criticised as lacking generalisability on that basis alone. The number and characteristics of eligible patients who were not entered, however, were documented by only a few trials; these data are critical in the assessment of generalisability. Additionally, the number of patients with the index disease who did not meet the eligibility criteria should also be documented. Together, these two types of data characterise the population to whom the trial results may be applied.     

Stopping Rules for Clinical Trials Implicitly Incorporating Safety Information

Clinical trials research is mainly conducted for the purpose of evaluating the relative efficacy of two or more treatments. However, a positive response due to treatment is not sufficient to put forward a new product because one must also demonstrate safety. In such cases, clinical trials which show a positive effect would need to accrue enough patients to also demonstrate that the new treatment is safe. It is our purpose to show how the efficacy and safety problems can be combined to yield a more practical clinical trial design. In this paper we propose an asymmetric stopping rule which allows the experimenter to terminate a clinical trial early for a sufficiently negative result and to continue to a specified number of patients otherwise. As it turns out, a few interim tests will have negligible effects on the overall significance level.     

BENEFITS TO RESEARCH SUBJECTS IN INTERNATIONAL TRIALS: DO THEY REDUCE EXPLOITATION OR INCREASE UNDUE INDUCEMENT?

There is an alleged tension between undue inducement and exploitation in research trials. This paper considers claims that increasing the benefits to research subjects enrolled in international, externally‐sponsored clinical trials should be avoided on the grounds that it may result in the undue inducement of research subjects. It proceeds from the premise that there are good grounds for thinking that, at least some, international research sponsors exploit trial participants because they do not provide the research population with a fair share of the benefits of research. This provides a prima facie argument for increasing the benefits for research participants. Concern over undue inducement is a legitimate moral concern; however, if this concern is to prevent research populations from receiving their fair share of benefits from research there must be sufficient evidence that these benefits will unduly influence patients’ decision‐making regarding trial participation. This article contributes to the debate about exploitation versus undue inducement by introducing an analysis of the available empirical research into research participants’ motivations and the influence of payments on research subjects’ behaviour and risk assessment. Admittedly, the available research in this field is limited, but the research that has been conducted suggests that financial rewards do not distort research subjects’ behaviour or blind them to the risks involved with research. Therefore, I conclude that research sponsors should prioritise the prevention of exploitation in international research by providing greater benefits to research participants.     

Embryonic stem cells: are useful in clinic treatments?

It is not uncommon to find statements in the social media and even in some scientific journals declaring that embryonic stem cells can be used in human medicine for therapeutic purposes. In our opinion, this statement does not fit the medical reality. To go into this subject in depth, and if possible to clarify it, we reviewed the most recent literature on clinical trials conducted with embryonic stem cells, concluding that up to the present time, there is only one ongoing clinical trial being carried out with these types of cells to treat a small group of patients with spinal cord injury. The results of this trial have still not been published. In conclusion, at present, there is only evidence of one phase I clinical trial conducted with embryonic stem cells, in comparison to the numerous trials conducted with adult stem cells.     

Paradigms of expected failure

This study explores the outsourcing and offshoring of clinical trials and how they interconnect with the dynamics of drug development and regulation in the United States. I focus on the activities of United States-based contract research organizations, which make up a specialized global clinical trials industry focusing on the recruitment of human subjects and investigators. Tracking this industry’s activities in eastern Europe and Latin America, two clinical trial market ‘growth regions,’ I address the strategies of evidence-making that inform clinical trial offshoring. I also show how aspects of the clinical trial model—in which failures to predict safety outcomes or a paradigm of expected failure—are being exported along with the offshored trial. The clinical trials industry is a crucial, highly mobile, and profitable arm of the global pharmaceutical industry. Where state agencies furnish limited or no health care, drug developers claim that trial expansion and experiments have become social goods in themselves. But questions remain: How is drug value and research integrity maintained? And how do the results of clinical trials strengthen or undermine the delivery of affordable and effective interventions? As this essay shows, clinical trials are not only hypothesis-testing instruments; they are operative environments redistributing resources and occasioning tense medical and social fields. In highlighting the inefficiencies and uncertainties of global drug development, this study points to problems in the operational model of drug development and in systems of human protection. It also considers new forms of accountability at the nexus of private sector science and public health.     

Cancer gene therapy – state-of-the-art

A number of gene therapy clinical trials are being carried out the world over. Gene therapy is being applied in (I) cancer diseases, involving the largest number of patients, (II) monogenic diseases, (III) infectious diseases, (IV) vascular diseases, (V) autoimmune diseases and others. In the last decade, several strategies of cancer gene therapy have emerged due to a rapid development of gene delivery systems, both viral (recombinant retroviruses, adenoviruses, AAVs, herpes viruses) and nonviral (liposomes, gene guns, electroporation). To date four main strategies of cancer gene therapy have been evaluated in clinical trials: (I) immunogene therapy, (II) suicide gene therapy, (III) antiangiogenic gene therapy, (IV) and administration of tumour suppressor genes.These strategies mostly involve: malignant melanoma, prostate cancer, renal cell cancer, colon cancer, breast and ovarian cancers, lung cancers, neoplastic diseases of the blood and brain tumours.At the Department of Cancer Immunology at the GreatPoland Cancer Center Gene Modified Tumour Vaccine has been tested in malignant melanoma patients for more than six years. Due to encouraging results from phase I and II of clinical trials a phase III was designed and will be started in 2003.     

A novel approach to reducing disparities in health outcomes by enhancing interpretation of cancer clinical trials for underrepresented patient groups

There has been a growing realization, based on emerging evidence from the point of care, that real-world outcomes of patients with cancer are often inferior to those reported in conventional clinical trials. This phenomenon can be attributed in part to deficits in external validity that are present in many studies. Several factors contribute to external validity deficits, including: narrow eligibility criteria; differences between protocol-specified procedures and routine care; and inadequate access to clinical trial participation among underrepresented and socioeconomically disadvantaged groups. As a result, the current body of clinical evidence derived from conventional clinical trials can be inadequate to inform patient-specific treatment decisions at the point of care. Furthermore, lack of practical guidance on how to evaluate the impact of external validity deficits can impede both the design of more generalizable clinical trials and efforts to personalize treatment decisions for individual patients. In this methodological review, we suggest an approach to aid clinicians in such evaluations, providing visual and quantitative methods for assessing the magnitude of, and adjusting for, the impact of external validity deficits in conventional clinical trials. Our methods and visualizations have broad applicability across important areas of real-world medical decision-making and research, providing opportunities to design clinical studies that are more reflective of the diverse needs of patients with cancer, including those excluded from traditional clinical trials due to narrow eligibility criteria, socioeconomic disadvantages, and other systemic barriers to equitable access to healthcare resources.     

Transplantation of normal or genetically modified myoblasts for the treatment of hereditary or acquired diseases

The clinical trials of myoblast transplantation in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) patients produced disappointing results. The main problems responsible for these poor results have since then been identified and partially resolved. One of them was related to the use of an inadequate immunosuppression and, since then, immunosuppression with FK506 has permitted successful myoblast transplantation not only in mice but also in monkeys. The requirement for a sustained immunosuppression may be eventually avoided by developing a state of tolerance to the allogeneic cells or by autologous transplantation of genetically corrected myoblasts or stem cells. The rapid death of 75-80% of the injected myoblasts during the first five days has also contributed to the limited success of the early trials. This death was due to an inflammatory reaction and has been compensated in animal experiments by the injection of a larger number of cells (30 millions per cc). Finally, the myoblasts migrated only 0.5 mm away from their site of injection. This problem is currently compensated in animal experiments by injecting the myoblasts at every mm. The number of injections required may eventually be reduced by transfecting myoblasts with one or several metalloproteinase genes. The very good results obtained during the last two years in primates permit us to undertake a new phase I clinical trial to verify that myoblast transplantation can lead to the formation of muscle fibers expressing normal dystrophin in muscles of DMD patients.     

Sample Size Reassessment and Hypothesis Testing in Adaptive Survival Trials

Mid-study design modifications are becoming increasingly accepted in confirmatory clinical trials, so long as appropriate methods are applied such that error rates are controlled. It is therefore unfortunate that the important case of time-to-event endpoints is not easily handled by the standard theory. We analyze current methods that allow design modifications to be based on the full interim data, i.e., not only the observed event times but also secondary endpoint and safety data from patients who are yet to have an event. We show that the final test statistic may ignore a substantial subset of the observed event times. An alternative test incorporating all event times is found, where a conservative assumption must be made in order to guarantee type I error control. We examine the power of this approach using the example of a clinical trial comparing two cancer therapies.     

Adenoviral gene therapy, radiation, and prostate cancer

Viral gene therapy has exceptional potential as a specifically tailored cancer treatment. However, enthusiasm for cancer gene therapy has varied over the years, partly owing to safety concerns after the death of a young volunteer in a clinical trial for a genetic disease. Since this singular tragedy, results from numerous clinical trials over the past 10 years have restored the excellent safety profile of adenoviral vectors. These vectors have been extensively studied in phase I and II trials as intraprostatically administered agents for patients with locally recurrent and high-risk local prostate cancer. Promising therapeutic responses have been reported in several studies with both oncolytic and suicide gene therapy strategies. The additional benefit of combining gene therapy with radiation therapy has also been realized; replicating adenoviruses inhibit DNA repair pathways, resulting in a synergistic sensitization to radiation. Other, nonreplicating suicide gene therapy strategies are also significantly enhanced with radiation. Combined radiation/gene therapy is currently being studied in phase I and II clinical trials and will likely be the first adenoviral gene therapy mechanism to become available to urologists in the clinic. Systemic gene therapy for metastatic disease is also a major goal of the field, and clinical trials are currently under way for hormone-resistant metastatic prostate cancer. Second- and third-generation "re-targeted" viral vectors, currently being developed in the laboratory, are likely to further improve these systemic trials.     

Bayesian approaches to joint cure-rate and longitudinal models with applications to cancer vaccine trials

Complex issues arise when investigating the association between longitudinal immunologic measures and time to an event, such as time to relapse, in cancer vaccine trials. Unlike many clinical trials, we may encounter patients who are cured and no longer susceptible to the time-to-event endpoint. If there are cured patients in the population, there is a plateau in the survival function, S(t), after sufficient follow-up. If we want to determine the association between the longitudinal measure and the time-to-event in the presence of cure, existing methods for jointly modeling longitudinal and survival data would be inappropriate, since they do not account for the plateau in the survival function. The nature of the longitudinal data in cancer vaccine trials is also unique, as many patients may not exhibit an immune response to vaccination at varying time points throughout the trial. We present a new joint model for longitudinal and survival data that accounts both for the possibility that a subject is cured and for the unique nature of the longitudinal data. An example is presented from a cancer vaccine clinical trial.     

Dose-finding based on feasibility and toxicity in T-cell infusion trials

A new modality for treatment of cancer involves the ex vivo growth of cancer-specific T-cells for subsequent infusion into the patient. The therapeutic aim is selective destruction of cancer cells by the activated infused cells. An important problem in the early phase of developing such a treatment is to determine a maximal tolerated dose (MTD) for use in a subsequent phase II clinical trial. Dose may be quantified by the number of cells infused per unit body weight, and determination of an MTD may be based on the probability of infusional toxicity as a function of dose. As in a phase I trial of a new chemotherapeutic agent, this may be done by treating successive cohorts of patients at different dose levels, with each new level chosen adaptively based on the toxicity data of the patients previously treated. Such a dose-finding strategy is inadequate in T-cell infusion trials because the number of cells grown ex vivo for a given patient may be insufficient for infusing the patient at the current targeted dose. To address this problem, we propose an algorithm for trial conduct that determines a feasible MTD based on the probabilities of both infusibility and toxicity as functions of dose. The method is illustrated by application to a dendritic cell activated lymphocyte infusion trial in the treatment of acute leukemia. A simulation study indicates that the proposed methodology is both safe and reliable.     

Joint monitoring and prediction of accrual and event times in clinical trials

In many clinical trials, the primary endpoint is time to an event of interest, for example, time to cardiac attack or tumor progression, and the statistical power of these trials is primarily driven by the number of events observed during the trials. In such trials, the number of events observed is impacted not only by the number of subjects enrolled but also by other factors including the event rate and the follow‐up duration. Consequently, it is important for investigators to be able to monitor and predict accurately patient accrual and event times so as to predict the times of interim and final analyses and enable efficient allocation of research resources, which have long been recognized as important aspects of trial design and conduct. The existing methods for prediction of event times all assume that patient accrual follows a Poisson process with a constant Poisson rate over time; however, it is fairly common in real‐life clinical trials that the Poisson rate changes over time. In this paper, we propose a Bayesian joint modeling approach for monitoring and prediction of accrual and event times in clinical trials. We employ a nonhomogeneous Poisson process to model patient accrual and a parametric or nonparametric model for the event and loss to follow‐up processes. Compared to existing methods, our proposed methods are more flexible and robust in that we model accrual and event/loss‐to‐follow‐up times jointly and allow the underlying accrual rates to change over time. We evaluate the performance of the proposed methods through simulation studies and illustrate the methods using data from a real oncology trial.     

Variations in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer in Quebec between 1988 and 1994

BACKGROUND: The influence of organizational factors on the process and outcomes of the treatment of breast cancer has been extensively investigated. Although the quality of care is presumed to be better in larger centres, evidence is inconsistent. This study was conducted to determine whether therapies for patients with breast cancer varied according to hospital caseload. METHODS: Women newly diagnosed between 1988 and 1994 with early-stage node-negative primary breast cancer were randomly selected from the Quebec tumour registry and the Quebec hospital discharge database. Data were collected from medical charts, and only women having undergone dissection of the axilla were included in the analyses. Logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for case mix and organizational variables. RESULTS: The final sample included 1259 patients with node-negative stage I or II primary breast cancer. The proportion of women who underwent breast-conserving surgery increased significantly with hospital caseload (from 78.0% in hospitals admitting fewer than 25 new cases each year to 88.0% in those admitting 100 patients or more; p for trend < 0.001). This trend remained significant even after statistical adjustment for case mix and organizational factors (p for trend = 0.001). Of the 1039 women who underwent breast-conserving surgery 965 (92.9%) received radiotherapy. Use of systemic adjuvant therapy (tamoxifen or chemotherapy, or both) increased with the number of patients treated in a given centre (from 60.1% to 68.5%), but this trend disappeared after adjustment for case mix and other factors. The proportion of patients receiving systemic adjuvant therapy consistent with published consensus guidelines tended to increase with caseload for those treated in hospitals participating in multicentre clinical trials but decrease with caseload for patients in hospitals not involved in clinical research. INTERPRETATION: The care of patients in Quebec with early-stage breast cancer is characterized by a high prevalence of both breast-conserving surgery and systemic adjuvant therapy. Large centres, especially those actively involved in clinical research, rapidly adopt innovative therapeutic modalities.     

HIV vaccines: a global perspective

Twenty years after its recognition, HIV/AIDS has become the most important infectious disease globally and the leading cause of death in Africa. A preventive vaccine represents the best long-term hope for its control. The development of such a vaccine, however, has encountered a number of scientific challenges, including the lack of information on immune correlates of protection, the limitations in our understanding of the relevance of primate protection experiments in relation to vaccine-induced protection in humans, and the significance of genetic and immunologic variability of HIV strains for potential vaccine efficacy. Despite these uncertainties, the first phase I trial of an HIV vaccine was conducted in the United States in 1987. Since then more than 30 candidate vaccines have been tested in over 70 phase I/II clinical trials in both industrialized and developing countries. The first HIV vaccine trial in a developing country was conducted in 1993, six years after the first trial in the United States. Since then eighteen phase I/II trials and one phase III trial have been or are being conducted in developing countries, and additional phase II and III trials are planned to start in 2003. Most of these initial trials have been conducted in Thailand, but more recently trials have been initiated in Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean. Over the past years, the HIV vaccine development effort has followed three major overlapping paradigms. The first "wave" of candidate vaccines aimed at inducing neutralizing antibodies. The second wave focused on stimulation of CD8+ T-cell responses. The current "wave" of HIV vaccine research is aimed at optimizing both humoral and cell-mediated immune responses. The first generation of candidate vaccines (based on the HIV envelope protein) entered phase III efficacy evaluation in 1998, and definitive results from these trials will become available in 2003. Plans to ensure wide access to future HIV vaccines must be developed well in advance.     

Artificial womb technology and clinical translation: Innovative treatment or medical research?

In 2017 and 2019, two research teams claimed ‘proof of principle’ for artificial womb technology (AWT). AWT has long been a subject of speculation in bioethical literature, with broad consensus that it is a welcome development. Despite this, little attention is afforded to more immediate ethical problems in the development of AWT, particularly as an alternative to neonatal intensive care. To start this conversation, I consider whether experimental AWT is innovative treatment or medical research. The research–treatment distinction, pervasive in regulation worldwide, is intended to isolate research activities and subject them to a greater degree of oversight. I argue that there is a tendency in the literature to conceptualize AWT for partial ectogenesis as innovative treatment. However, there are sufficiently serious ethical concerns with experimental AWT that mean that it must not be first used on humans on the basis that it is a ‘beneficial treatment’. First, I outline the prospects for translation of AWT animal studies into treatment for human preterms. Second, I challenge the conceptualizations of experimental AWT as innovative treatment. It must be considered medical research to reflect the investigatory nature of the process and guarantee sufficient protections for subjects. Identifying that AWT is research is crucial in formulating further ethico-legal questions regarding the experimental use of AWT. Third, I demonstrate that clinical trials will be a necessary part of the clinical translation of AWT because of requirements laid out by regulators. I consider the justification for clinical trials and highlight some of the crucial ethical questions about the conditions under which they should proceed.